The Civic changes its head, and its roadmap. The government announced Monday, December 11 that the Independent Commission on Incest and Sexual Violence Against Children (Ciivise) would continue its work while expanding its missions. “Ciivise 2” will now be co-directed by Sébastien Boueilh, former rugby player and founder of the Colosse aux pieds d’église association, which fights against sexual violence, harassment and hazing in sporting and educational environments. He will co-chair the commission with Nathalie Mathieu, another association leader at the head of the commission since its creation in March 2021. The body will notably have to look into the issues of minor victims of prostitution, online child crime and child victims. of their peers.
“After three years of work […]”, it is essential to maintain the momentum created against sexual violence suffered by children”, explained in a statement sent to AFP on December 11, the Secretary of State for Children, Charlotte Caubel. The predecessor by Sébastien Boueilh, the magistrate Edouard Durand, removed from the Ciivise, believes that the instance is not really maintained. “It is not just a question of road map. It is first of all a question of doctrine, a public policy of social support: ‘I believe you – I protect you’, he wrote on the social network. The new organization gives no guarantee on this doctrine.” He expressed his concern to L’Express.
L’Express: Did you have an explanation as to the reason for your sidelining?
Edouard Durand: I have had no information since the day before yesterday. With Nathalie Mathieu, in a report dated June 12, 2023, an opinion entitled “The cost of denial”, we presented the figures for the annual cost of sexual violence against our children, estimated at nearly 10 billion euros per year. More precisely, we modeled a specialized care pathway for victims – for child victims today and for adults who were victims in their childhood – regardless of the violence suffered. We had also recommended fighting against denial, testimony after testimony, since the opening of the Ciivise. Gradually, I felt that what seemed obvious to me was not shared. On the contrary, there was hostility to maintaining the Ciivise. I cannot interpret the reason.
Why do you consider that the Civil War ended on Tuesday December 12?
What I got as explanations was that the Ciivise had made an inventory, and that today it was necessary to monitor the implementation of the recommendations. On the other hand, the fact that we confine the rest to monitoring the implementation of the recommendations, this means that the movement driven by the Ciivise has stopped. What was the Civilization? A space of recognition, gathering, legitimacy and solidarity. A space where the testimony of victims left the exclusively private register to access another dimension, which is of the order of the collective public register – because it is a public health problem.
This monitoring committee is not a permanent body, every day, in contact with victims, professionals, experts, institutions. It is a committee which evaluates the implementation of a public policy, but not the Ciivise. I consider that it was felt that it was no longer necessary to maintain this new space. I think this is an error, and that the total lack of consideration towards the people who entrusted their testimony to the Ciivise – not a word of recognition was uttered towards the 30,000 victims in the government press release – is the most explicit illustration of this. We must never forget that we are talking about one thing: sexual violence against children. This is proof that what is forbidden is not committing them. The forbidden thing is to talk about it.
On the social network What do you mean ?
Civility is this watchword: you must believe the child who reveals violence and immediately put him or her in safety. Today, what guarantee is given to this line and this doctrine? I was not given an explicit reason for my exclusion, but it can only be linked to the doctrine as it is formulated in the introduction and summary of the report.
You mentioned the case of “30,000 victims sent back into silence”. Why did you have this formula?
It’s not one of them. I am amazed that, in a government press release relating to sexual violence, concerning a commission established after the speech addressed by the President of the Republic himself to all adults who had been victims of sexual violence in their childhood and which promised them that ‘they would “never be alone again”… Three years later, their presence does not even surface in the government’s pen. There is not a word of gratitude. It was the same thing when there was no official representation during the restitution of the three years of work of the Ciivise, last November 20, at the Maison de la radio. Nothing. Once again, the forbidden thing is to talk about it.
Don’t you think that a taboo has been lifted in recent years on the subject? We think in particular of public speaking engagements, like that of Emmanuelle Béart, or the publication of novels like Sad tiger.
Of course, there was an awareness in society. Many great voices have contributed very powerfully to lifting the taboo, particularly through literature. Institutions have also done it, such as the Sauvé commission. The victims themselves, through social networks. Yes, there is awareness. What is denial? Denial is: “It’s not true, it doesn’t exist, it doesn’t matter. It doesn’t concern me. There’s nothing we can do.” Fortunately, things are changing in society today. The Civic was to be this space of collective consciousness, of transformation into public policy. And besides, no one disputes his work. It is actually quite spectacular to say to him like this: “Bravo, goodbye.” I see it as both progress, but also a setback. Contemporary history is a succession of opening in the face of denial, then closure again. My fear today is that, once again, society will close itself on the words of victims, and will once again provoke denial.
You would have liked to see the Ciivise continue in its current form.
Obviously I would not have stayed twenty-five years at the head of Ciivise. We must be able to create stability and duration. Otherwise, what meaning does all this have? We have not had any acknowledgment of receipt of the notice of June 12, 2023, work which nevertheless responded to a request from the government.
How do you see the future of the Ciivise today?
I am in the worst position to answer. I don’t want to fall into the customization trap. All I know is that we have strived, for three years, to be faithful to the trust of the people who have entrusted us with their testimony. To live up to their dignity, their expectations, their demands. We have highlighted the fact that, in 92% of cases, a child who discloses violence does not receive a response in the form of social support. Not an individual response, but a public policy.
Only 8% of child victims receive a response that can be compared to “I believe you and I protect you”. This multitude of people who joined the Ciivise did so inseparably to find the recognition that society had never given them, and so that their words contribute to the protection of children. For these people, as for all human beings, the need for recognition is a vital need.
.